Slashdot Mirror


Shielding Domain Registration Info?

occamboy asks: "I'd like to register a new domain, but I'm tired of getting tons of spam (most filtered, but some not) and snail mail whenever I register a new domain. In short, I'd like the domain, but I don't want to announce the details of its owner to the world. I was thinking of using GoDaddy's domain proxy, but the terms are scary: they reserve the right to change the agreement anytime, by posting the new terms on their site, and the buyer automatically agrees to the new terms. What's to prevent them from grabbing my domain name from me, or doing some other nefarious thing? So, is there any good way to anonymously acquire a domain? Should I just register with fake info, use a service ... or what?"

93 comments

  1. Use fake information by mind21_98 · · Score: 1

    But use a real email address (in case you lose your password and such). This will at least cut down on the junk paper mail. Hope this helps!

    1. Re:Use fake information by brewthatistrue · · Score: 5, Informative

      well, if you are worried about what agreements you are entering into, ICANN requires valid contact information. How often your info will be checked for validity varies, but if you get caught with fraudulent info you can lose your domain. http://www.icann.org/registrars/wdrp.htm http://www.internetprivacyadvocate.org/ProtectYour PersonalInfo.htm (urls via google keywords: whois contact icann)

  2. PO Box by Arngautr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use a PO Box and an email account I can throw away if things get too bad. I think I might try the 'protected' option next time as the price isn't too bad.

    1. Re:PO Box by svanstrom · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The PO box might not be a bad idea, but if you're outside the US you won't really need that (I get one snailmailspam per owned domain per year nowadays).

      You also might want to get yourself a good spamfilter, instead of trying to hide.

      Personally I use a combination of procmail (on in and outgoing e-mails) and bogofilter, which has for the past cpl of years (basically since bogofilter was created) stopped more than 99+% of all spam; with less than 1 false positive per month (out of 3'000-5'000 caught spam per month).

      Basically I use procmail to catch a number of "I know for sure this isn't spam" (incl. using lists of outgoing message-ids) and "I know for sure this is spam" (incl. honeytraps, never used [random-words]@mydomail.tld which has been sold as real adresses to lots of spammers etc) to have the bayesian filter automatically trained to catch all new forms of spam.

      --
      perl -e'print$_{$_} for sort%_=`lynx -dump svanstrom.com/t`'
    2. Re:PO Box by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The PO box might not be a bad idea, but if you're outside the US you won't really need that (I get one snailmailspam per owned domain per year nowadays).

      Assuming the only reason you want the PO box is to stop junk mail. Personally I don't want any random slashdotter finding out my address.

    3. Re:PO Box by base3 · · Score: 1

      If someone wants your address bad enough, they're not going to stop at whois. (I guess this is a bit trollish, since I use a PO box in domain registrations, too. But I have no illusion that someone who wanted to find out where I live could if they so desired.) I also take the added precaution of misspelling my name. If I were ever called on it, I could claim it was a typo. But it makes it harder to use Google, county property tax records, or what have you to find me.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    4. Re:PO Box by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If someone wants your address bad enough, they're not going to stop at whois.

      Heh, it took the FBI about a year to find me back in 96 (some idiot was running a vigilante justice site on my webhosting site and apparently was sending threatening letters through the USPS, eventually they were able to trace me through my New York license which they got after finding my New Jersey address on whois and then tracing that to my New York address, finally they called me one day and asked for the contact information of the vigilante, whose site I had already blocked long ago, and I gave them the name that was listed commenting that it was probably fake). So yeah, it's possible, but it's pretty damn hard. Even harder now that I'm living with someone and the lease is in her name. You'd probably have to figure out her name first, at least if you wanted to use public records.

    5. Re:PO Box by dacarr · · Score: 1

      Good idea, but that's not really what a post office box is for as far as domains is concerned. See my post below.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    6. Re:PO Box by shufler · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the FBI just ask the IRS? Isn't reporting a false address on your tax returns illegal?

    7. Re:PO Box by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Well, I probably hadn't yet filed a tax return for my New York address. I've moved something like 6 times in the last 7 years.

    8. Re:PO Box by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Probably a good idea, years ago an internet freind in Australia got wigged out over a nazi spam she got. Wasn't to hard to track it through it British host to someone in florida, never was completely sure exactly who sent it but it was either a father or a son and I found street addresses on both.

      I occaslionaly google for my name, user names I use, telephone number, SSN and driver liciense number just to see what everybody else can see.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  3. godaddy by Da_Slayer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Currently I use domain's by proxy via godaddy for my domain names. Yeah the terms are scary and I have also started looking for some place else to go. I got a letter in the mail (actual paper) from another domain company asking me if I want to switch. I personally do not like the idea of people seeing my info and being able to spam me to high heaven on the listed email address.

    Honestly if your just a normal site with nothing illegal on it I do not see the need for other peopel to see your personal information.

    As for using fake information... I think that the US government is cracking down on this and is passing laws to really kick you in the butt for using false information. Currently this is a lose lose situation.

    All a domain registry company needs to be sucessful is to have all information listed for the WHOIS as anonymous and only release it with a court order. Which would have to be hand delivered by an officer of the law. That is just my opinion, I could be wrong.

    --
    Push harder towards Open Media/Content
    1. Re:godaddy by Da_Slayer · · Score: 1

      I did some more reading of the TOS for Domains by Proxy. I like how they can totally kill your account and domain name without any real proof or contact to you. It is one of those nice catch all things that big corporations put in:

      4. DBP'S RIGHTS TO DENY, SUSPEND, TERMINATE SERVICE AND TO DISCLOSE YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION ...
      (iii) resolve any and all third party claims, whether threatened or made, arising out of Your use of a domain name registered by DBP on Your behalf; or (iv) take any other action DBP deems necessary: blah blah blah SPAM.

      So if someone goes to them an claims you are in violation of their trademark or copywrite DBP can just give them your information without having to contact you at all. Is it just me or is it really dumb that they do not have some sort of verification process to see if a claim even has any merit before turning over information. Also part iv is just fantastic. I will let this old slashdot article on the subject explain that. What about our rights when we purchase these domain names?

      --
      Push harder towards Open Media/Content
  4. Sneakemail it by polymath69 · · Score: 4, Informative
    This won't do anything about the postal spam, but give your email as a sneakemail address. Then whenever that address gets harvested for spam, you can cancel it, set up a new one, and update your whois record.

    It will still get harvested... but you'll probably only have to cycle it a couple of times a year. The three or four spams a year that'll get through is probably negligible.

    This is a good strategy for /. email, too.

    --

    --
    I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
    1. Re:Sneakemail it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use sneakemail for my domains, and it works very well.

      Instead of changing the address when you start getting spam, enable the "gray listing" feature for that sneakemail address. I get no spam now for that email address, and I haven't had to change it in many months. Email from my registrar still gets through fine.

    2. Re:Sneakemail it by Dark$ide · · Score: 1
      My UK Nominet registration doesn't include an e-mail address in their WHOIS info.

      If it did I'd use http://www.spamgourmet.com/ to provide a disposable address.

      --

      Sigs. We don't need no steenking sigs.

    3. Re:Sneakemail it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As long as you check your email, of course.

      If someone makes ANY complaint against you about your domain or your website, your registrar will typically email you a notification and require a response/action on your part to prevent your domain from being redirected to NULL. If you fail to response, they will assume that your address is fake and then shut down your domain on the basis of false information in your registration.

      I had some underage little twit complain about my website. I don't know what their deal was but it was just some random made up complaint. I was really busy and didn't notice the request from dotster to respond. Luckily, I happened to do a whois on my own domain the very day it was being changed and noticed the DNS servers had been changed to 'NULL'.

      Now that domain updates occur every 5 minutes, I would probably be completely fucked before I had a chance to act. It would have been terrible, too - I have about 100,000 members and about 500,000 pages served per day. Losing my domain for any period of time would be embarrassing and ruin my reliability.

      The problem I have is that there are a lot of crazy people out there and the last thing I want is someone knowing my real phone number, email address and physical address so they can come stalk or harass me if I ban them from my website. Worse, imagine some girl who has been raped and sets up her own website to deal with the aftermath of it. To express herself and discuss her tragedy with other people. Is it fair to make her give her phone number, email address and physical address?!? Hardly! What about children who want to own their own domains?

      Why is it so hard to have one set of private records for the registrar and another set for the public and to do it without charging an extra $10/yr per domain?!

    4. Re:Sneakemail it by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Informative
      Why is it so hard to have one set of private records for the registrar and another set for the public and to do it without charging an extra $10/yr per domain?!

      Because running a domain is a responsibility. As RFC 1591 puts it,

      Concerns about "rights" and "ownership" of domains are inappropriate. It is appropriate to be concerned about "responsibilities" and "service" to the community.

      If you don't want the responsibilities, including making contact information available, don't have your own domain. Or hire someone to perform those responsibilities for you.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  5. Get a PO or a fake the address by charlieafrid · · Score: 1

    That is the best way to go....real email address with a PO or a fake the address.

  6. Incorporate by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Form a company to own the domain, and register it in the name of that company. That way if someone really needs to find you they can, but it will take some work (they'll have to find where you incorporated and then find your name in that paperwork). That should keep the spammers away -- they hate real work.

    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    1. Re:Incorporate by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 1

      How much does it cost to incorporate in your jurisdiction?

      In these parts, I think it costs a few hundred bucks, maybe more.

    2. Re:Incorporate by TheClassic · · Score: 1

      You could always do a LLC which is a cheap alternative to incorporating.

    3. Re:Incorporate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In many jurisdictions, a LLC is more expensive than incorporating. In Iowa, for example, forming a LLC costs $100 while forming a corporation costs $50.

  7. Changing terms = suicide by Arngautr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For GoDaddy changing the terms materially, drastically to steal from/rip off customers would result in commercial suicide. As an online business the one thing they have going for them is the trust of their users and their reputation. They loose this and they loose business, they have a lot of business so the short term gains wouldn't match the long term losses.

    1. Re:Changing terms = suicide by Arngautr · · Score: 0

      Sorry for the repeat posting, but I thought it through a little more... How does this apply to paypal? I for one don't use them because of the horror stories. But they seem to be doing alright.

    2. Re:Changing terms = suicide by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 0, Troll

      Of course they're doing alright- I mean, you know all that money they steal in those horror stories? Where do you think it goes?

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    3. Re:Changing terms = suicide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They loose this and they loose business

      "lose". Both places.

  8. namecheap! by hookedup · · Score: 4, Interesting

    namecheap.com

    $8.88 USD domain registry, and like 5$ a year for a 'whoisguard' subscription per domain per year..nobody is getting your info without subpoena

    I use them for all of my domains, and couldnt imagine using anyone else..

    Also.. you should be wary of godaddy.. i've heard of them snatching up peoples domain for no good reason..

    1. Re:namecheap! by golgotha007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      great tip, I just registered thru them.

      By the way, namecheap is currently running a special, so the $5 'whoisguard' service is currently free. $8.88 for a domain, whoisguard included.

      awesome deal.

    2. Re:namecheap! by adam+mcmaster · · Score: 4, Informative

      RegisterFly.com offer something similar, only $1 to protect each domain. It puts something like this in the whois record:

      Registrant Contact:
      RegisterFly.com - Ref# 11453500
      Whois Protection Service - ProtectFly.com (11453500.fly@spamfly.com)
      +1.2122952121
      Fax: +1.2122952153
      230 Park Avenue
      Suite 864
      New York, NY 10169
      US

      That email address gets forwarded to your actual address, and it changes every so often so you don't get spam to it.

    3. Re:namecheap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've often wondered about places like that. Do you still have to pay the $35/yr for the domain name? Or is it really just $8.88 for everything?

    4. Re:namecheap! by hookedup · · Score: 1

      it really depends on the TLD, when I say $8.88, it's for .com/net/org..

      'international' TLDs tend to be a little more expensive..

    5. Re:namecheap! by rmohr02 · · Score: 1

      So when somebody has a legitimate reason to contact you, they're out of luck?

    6. Re:namecheap! by hookedup · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you have a "Set a new random WhoisGuard email in Whois" option in your account settings.makes accounts like s45nh4k5l2@whoisguard.namecheap.com that point to your real email, it's really quite sweet :)

    7. Re:namecheap! by hookedup · · Score: 1

      actually.. i just generated a new one, and got a2ddcb63469d4b03a4826f086a329e86.protect@whoisguar d.com

  9. Please don't fake your e-mail address by cgenman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sometimes people really do need to contact you. If your domain is causing problems or otherwise interfering with the network, or someone has a dispute with you but would rather not let it escalate to the point of sending nastygrams to the owner of your IP block, it is very convienient to be able to just e-mail someone. That's why it is there. Sending a message out to the larger hosting / access company usually results in absolutely nothing, especially if it is a large hosting company.

    Stay a part of the community. Keep your contact information available and up-to-date.

    1. Re:Please don't fake your e-mail address by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Keeping an email address current is not a big deal. There are anonymous remailers that will produce an email address that you can use once. This provides the benefits of contact in the case of problems.

      Keeping a *name* current, however, has no justification other than wanting to track down domain owners.

      Also, I would expect a domain registrar to consider information in their database confidential, something that they never release or sell.

      Of course, then they just find loopholes like merging with other companies that want to use data, like the financial services companies did -- sigh.

    2. Re:Please don't fake your e-mail address by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Sometimes people really do need to contact you.

      So you're suggesting not only giving a real email address, but actually reading the email which goes to it? That's just ludicrous.

      Personally I give my real name and an efax phone number where you can leave me voice mail. Everything else is fake. Well, the email address isn't "fake". It just forwards to /dev/null.

    3. Re:Please don't fake your e-mail address by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

      If you were one of the people that gets 600+ messages per day of just pure crap and has had to change e-mail addresses three times in order to start fresh, you wouldn't be saying that.

      That being said, just register a hotmail account and put info there. Check it once a week. If you start getting spam, delete it and make a new one.

      --Dan

    4. Re:Please don't fake your e-mail address by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do get a lot of crap. My domain registration e-mail is filtered through POBox.com's spam filter, then my ISP's spam filter, then my local copy of K9, before it hits the hotword killfile filter on my e-mail client. I also give everyone a different e-mail address under one of my domains based upon their name, and simply add those to the killfile when they start spamming up.

      So yes, I get a lot of pure crap. But the benefit of having people able to contact me is worth the effort. Of course I would never say that if I had a single box which had to be protected at all times, which I probably should have pointed out.

    5. Re:Please don't fake your e-mail address by darksoulz · · Score: 1

      Not such a great idea. Hotmail can shut down addresses used for domain registration. They consider it commercial which is against their TOS. Not that they are very quick about it, but it's happened before.

  10. Do you know a good registrar? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Insightful


    Do you know a good domain registrar? The first step is to find a good registrar. The second step is to solve the domain registration info problem.

    My experience with GoDaddy is that the company is very abusive. GoDaddy is always trying to sell something else; there are such a huge number of ads that it interferes with proper operation of their web site. Many of the ads seem to me to try to take advantage of people who don't know much about the Internet.

    The GoDaddy web site is, in my opinion, amateurish. There are issues like having a password field with 13 spaces, but actually accepting only 11 characters for a password. (I don't know if they have fixed that since I mentioned it to them.)

    It's simply outrageous that a company says they can change the terms of a contract with you without your permission, or even knowing. Legally, that cannot be a contract. A contract only exists if you agree to the terms. You cannot enter into a contract that is so broad that you agree to be bound by any terms in the future.

    It's amazing how abusive companies are becoming. They seem to be trying to see who can be the most abusive. Have a look at an Ed Foster column that says that the problem is less in Europe: Anti-Sneakwrap Law is UnAmerican.

    I knew a three-year-old who once told me: 1) I can do anything I want. 2) You have no control. This is understandable in a three-year-old, who is merely testing the limits. I don't accept it coming from anyone who is older.

    Things are really bad in the U.S. now, it seems. Everything to help powerful people get richer. Nothing to take care of the average person.

    --
    Bush: Spending money the U.S. doesn't have to try to make his administration look good.

    1. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course, the reason why is fear of liability.

      If US legal cases had capped damages, companies wouldn't be so hung up on avoiding the slightest hint of liability, willing to lose customers, even, to avoid the faintest trace.

      A friend from Norway once told me that the reason that Norway doesn't have the problems with ridiculous worries over liability that the US does isn't that it's harder to prosecute a case in Norway. It's just that multimillion dollar awards are unheard of. You get restitution, but not scads of money above and beyond.

      Cut down on the amount of money floating around in the legal system, and you return sanity to the consumer world.

    2. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > Cut down on the amount of money floating around
      > in the legal system, and you return sanity to
      > the consumer world.

      You've been suckered by insurance industry propaganda. There is no "liability crisis".

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by chez69 · · Score: 1

      really? have you ever practiced medicine and paid malpractice insurance?

      I know several doctors who do, even though they have a spotless record, they pay huge premiums.

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
    4. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by wonkavader · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that's in large part because of the stock market. Insurance companies don't make a profit on insurance. They make a small, acceptable loss on it, a fraction of a percent, if things are going well.

      They invest the capital they get and that's where they make their money.

      They lost a huge amount of money on the stock market bubble, and the losses they take on the insurance now look larger -- it's a bigger percent in relation to their capital.

      That's not saying that malpractice claims aren't up. Just that they don't explain the incredible jump in malpractice insurance costs. The size of that jump is because of the stock market.

      I first heard this from a statistician at the University of Chicago, and later got confirmation from some folks who worked in insurance.

      The main problem I have with the situation is that we hear a great deal about tort reform

      "because malpractice suits are spiraling out of control!"

      when a truthful explanation would be

      "because malpractice suits are up, and we lost a LOT on the stock market!"

    5. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Things are really bad in the U.S. now, it seems. Everything to help powerful people get richer. Nothing to take care of the average person.


      It's easy to think that when you assume that everybody who owns or runs a business is rich and/or powerful. Too bad that's not the case. Most people who run a small to medium sized business are average people.

    6. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the general practitioners in West Virginia who are leaving because costs of medical practice have been exceeding revenues.

      I'm not saying that business doesn't like to use liability as a playing card. But there really is a significant problem.

    7. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by mabu · · Score: 1

      I shopped around for years. I refuse to use Godaddy and NSI. I think there is no perfect registrar, but I've been very pleased with Dotster. When I first started they were running a horrendously-inefficient .ASP-based system that croaked during peak hours. I complained and apparently they listened, and converted over to PHP and their system works much better now.

    8. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by mabu · · Score: 1

      If US legal cases had capped damages, companies wouldn't be so hung up on avoiding the slightest hint of liability, willing to lose customers, even, to avoid the faintest trace.

      Puleeze. Try that propaganda someplace where the readers have an average I.Q. under 50.

      For every goofy case you can cite that appears to be an abuse of the system, there are a thousand people who were shafted by corporate america and don't get the justice they deserve. Stop propagating myths trumped up by corporate america to further screw over the consumer. We don't need tort reform; we need court reform and corporate reform.

    9. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      And so what is your explanation for the hyper-avoidance of liability in the United States?

      I'm not proposing an end to restitution -- what I don't like is punitive damages.

      For every goofy case you can cite that appears to be an abuse of the system, there are a thousand people who were shafted by corporate america and don't get the justice they deserve.

      The problem is that the current model -- allow those who sue to take as large a chunk of flesh as they can rip off -- clearly has major problems. I'm watching general practitioners unable to practice in West Virginia because the costs of insurance now exceed the money that can be made. I drink my coffee in the morning from a cup with a safety-molded top with a tiny slit in it so that the coffee can only come out slowly with a big extruded text warning reading "CAUTION: BEVERAGE MAY BE HOT! SIP WITH CAUTION!" I want to pont out that no products can list actual health hazards any more because they're drowned out with cover-your-ass garbage added onto the products by corporate lawyers.

      Stop propagating myths trumped up by corporate america to further screw over the consumer.

      Really? I can't think of many times that a consumer had a real, legitimate problem but couldn't get anything done, and I can think of an awful lot of lawsuits in the news that I'd consider to be bullshit. And the news that I watch tends to be vaguely liberal -- not somewhere you'd expect to see a pro-corporate bias.

      I have strong (and vocally expressed) views about things that I view as abusable by large corporations, like the current patent system. However, if a system is abused by consumers, it's just as broken as one abused by corporations.

    10. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You've been suckered by insurance industry propaganda. There is no "liability crisis".

      And I only have your word for that?

    11. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I can't think of many times that a consumer had a real, legitimate problem but couldn't get anything done, and I can think of an awful lot of lawsuits in the news that I'd consider to be bullshit. And the news that I watch tends to be vaguely liberal -- not somewhere you'd expect to see a pro-corporate bias.

      that just means you are uneducated abotu the topic.

    12. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by mabu · · Score: 1
      And so what is your explanation for the hyper-avoidance of liability in the United States?

      I'm not proposing an end to restitution -- what I don't like is punitive damages.

      For every goofy case you can cite that appears to be an abuse of the system, there are a thousand people who were shafted by corporate america and don't get the justice they deserve.

      The problem is that the current model -- allow those who sue to take as large a chunk of flesh as they can rip off -- clearly has major problems. I'm watching general practitioners unable to practice in West Virginia because the costs of insurance now exceed the money that can be made. I drink my coffee in the morning from a cup with a safety-molded top with a tiny slit in it so that the coffee can only come out slowly with a big extruded text warning reading "CAUTION: BEVERAGE MAY BE HOT! SIP WITH CAUTION!" I want to pont out that no products can list actual health hazards any more because they're drowned out with cover-your-ass garbage added onto the products by corporate lawyers.


      You know, I KNEW you were going to bring up the McDonald's case as an example, and fall prey to the same ignorant propaganda that you're regurgitate. How much do you actually know about the infamous McDonald's coffee-spill case? Have you read the court documents? No, I bet your impression of the abuse of the legal system is the result of 10-second soundbytes spewed at you from Fox News.

      Why don't you read that case. Get the original documents and don't further propagate completely inaccurate characterizations.

      This is one of the classic cases that shills for the insurance industry foise upon the public without disclosing the whole details, to call attention to outrageous punitive damages. In the McDonald's case they don't tell you a number of things:

      The Facts

      McFacts about the McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit

      Everyone knows what you're talking about when you mention "the McDonald's lawsuit." Even though this case was decided in August of 1994, for many Americans it continues to represent the "problem" with our civil justice system.

      The business community and insurance industry have done much to perpetuate this case. They don't want us to forget it. They know it helps them convince politicians that "tort reform" and other restrictions on juries is needed. And worse, they know it poisons the minds of citizens who sit on juries.

      Unfortunately, not all the facts have been communicated - facts that put the case and the monetary award to the 81-year old plaintiff in a significantly different light.

      According to the Wall Street journal, McDonald's callousness was the issue and even jurors who thought the case was just a tempest in a coffee pot were overwhelmed by the evidence against the Corporation.

      The facts of the case, which caused a jury of six men and six women to find McDonald's coffee was unreasonably dangerous and had caused enough human misery and suffering that no one should be made to suffer exposure to such excessively hot coffee again, will shock and amaze you:

      McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

      McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

      McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

      McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporati

    13. Re:Do you know a good registrar? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      You know, I KNEW you were going to bring up the McDonald's case as an example, and fall prey to the same ignorant propaganda that you're regurgitate

      Actually, I didn't bring up the case. I was just complaining about my coffee cup. I don't know what set of cases prompted the change -- it could well have been the McDonalds one. You did.

      But, hey, I'm happy to argue about this case, because I've argued against it in the past on Slashdot, and I'm familiar with the arguments both ways.

      For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

      Your first statement is loaded. This does not indicate a problem. McDonalds knew that they sold their coffee hotter. They did not "know that they had a problem with the way they make their coffee".

      Do you want to know why McDonalds sold their coffee hotter? Because they did focus group tests and discovered that people preferred to get their coffee hotter.

      McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

      Sure. Why is this surprising? You're citing an absolute number in the case of a very large corporation to try to make the thing sound larger. This is McDonalds. They sell a billion cups of coffee a year. That's seventy incidents a year -- or saying that people burned themselves with coffee .000007 percent of the time. I've burned myself at home with hot drinks before. I average under a hot drink a day. Let's say I've had 10,000 hot drinks in my life (which is probably an overestimate). If I burned myself *once* (which is an underestimate, again in your favor), I'm already looking at a .01% burn rate.

      McDonalds is a favorite target for lawsuits because they are large and value PR highly. McDonalds has been sued for making people obese, for not using healthiest varieties of cooking oils, and all sorts of things that are completely out of whack with common sense.

      As for knowing that people hurt themselves -- sure. I'd expect that some McDonalds customer has managed to hurt themselves by stabbing themselves in the eye with a McDonalds plastic fork or knife at least once too. Did McDonalds consult a knife wound expert? Of course not -- there's no systematic endangerment above what you'd expect.

      The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

      Jury members in the case were quoted as making their decision after seeing the extent of the injuries -- *not* what they should been deciding culpability on. If I give someone an Oreo and they manage to choke themselves to death on it, the fact that they died is completely irrelevant as to determining whether I am culpable.

      Yes, she was an old lady, she was holding the cup right in a rather dangerous spot between her legs and dumped the hot coffee right in the wrong spot, and she didn't remove her clothes after doing so, and she ended up getting hurt. McDonalds gave her something that she could hurt herself with, she exhibited bad judgement and managed to hurt herself. Does the woman not brew tea at home? I expect an adult to be able to deal with the realities of handling *boiling* water, much less 180 degree coffee.

      The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.

      This is again irrelevant as to whether McDonalds is at fault -- it's an emotional plea. Works nicely on juries, but it's not appropri

  11. GANDI by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Informative

    You said that you were worry about proxies -- I have secondhand that GANDI is a good registrar -- prices slightly higer than GoDaddy, but significantly better (as in favoring the user versus the registrar) policies. Not sure if they provide a proxy service.

    1. Re:GANDI by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      I had trouble with their DNS service when I was using them a few years back.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:GANDI by wikinerd · · Score: 1

      I checked their website and I found that GANDI does not provide a proxy service, but can hide your email address. It is interesting though, that GANDI has released DNS software under the GPL.

    3. Re:GANDI by belroth · · Score: 1

      I'm with GANDI, I like them. One of the reasons I went with them was that they clearly state in theit Ts&Cs that the domain is mine, and that they're just looking after the dns etc for me.
      I don't know much about them except I have had two domains for a few years and no problems. The only communications I get from them are to warn me that the domain registration will expire in a month or so and how to renew if I choose. Very low pressure, it Just Works The Way I Want (tm).

      --
      I hereby inform you that I have NOT been required to provide any decryption keys.
    4. Re:GANDI by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

      I've got several domains with Gandi as well. No ads on their site, no additional-cost "features" that should be part of the deal in the first place. Everything is right there, completely configurable. Not for newbies, though -- I recommend Domain Direct for an easy-to-use interface. DD is a lot higher sometimes, but the nice thing is that they'll give me a cut if you click here (shameless, aren't I?).

      Plus, it's kind of cool to pay 12 euros for a Gandi domain, and see a few days later how many US bucks that is (used to be ~10, now ~15... I have a greater appreciation of the currency markets now). I also use the French version of the site, just for a challenge (I'm also running the FR version of Opera for the same reason).

      I'm actually moving my domains away from Opera, though, because I get a good deal from my web host. But that deal comes at a price -- I can't go in and tweak my info on those domains (though the Dryline guy is very responsive).

      --
      Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  12. Godaddy's domains by proxy by x69 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Be careful using domains by proxy. All someone has to do is email or send a letter to them saying you are violating their copyrights and with or without any proof at all they will release your personal information, remove the proxy service from your domain and charge you a $20 administrative fee.
    I run a website that lists mp3 song album and song names and I have had this happen to me several times sofar. Be careful.
    -Gerard

    1. Re:Godaddy's domains by proxy by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      I run a website that lists mp3 song album and song names and I have had this happen to me several times sofar. Be careful.

      Who cares? That site seems nigh useless. Any reputable warez dealer trades by Bittorrent with md5 signatures for guaraneed accuracy.

      --
    2. Re:Godaddy's domains by proxy by x69 · · Score: 1

      Who cares? That site seems nigh useless. Any reputable warez dealer trades by Bittorrent with md5 signatures for guaraneed accuracy.

      That is not the point of my original post or the site itself. The site is just a database of when albums were released onto the net and copyright holders just do searches for their .mp3 and send out cease and desist letters although there are no files. Godaddy will release your personal information AND charge you a $20 fee without even checking to see if their claims are valid.
      -Gerard

  13. top level domain .spam by jeisc · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't icann just make a top level domain with the name of .spam. And any body doing spam be required to use it and if not, block their sending domain on the DNS servers and then, the filtering will be easy for anyone who doesn't want to have spam. Just block dotspam.

    Spammers can offer mail accounts on spam channels so those who want spam can get spam accounts on different spam channels. Remember there are those who have eaten spam and liked it. Personally I know of no one who has had this experience but such a person might exist.

    We could have car.spam for those who like cars.spam or microsoft .spam for those who like ms. or linux.spam for those who like penguins etc, etc.

    It seems so simple has anyone suggested this already.

    --
    This is a test!
    1. Re:top level domain .spam by Kristoffer+Lunden · · Score: 1

      If opt-in was enough for the spammers, we wouldn't have spam. If absolutely noone that recieved unsolicited offers bought anything, we wouldn't have spam.

      Spam is there because opt-in does not work - for the spammers. What you are proposing is just that, nothing more. Their target audience will not go out of their way and register to get spammed, but when they get mails anyway, they buy.

      If spammers would be satisfied with your suggestion, it would already have been solved without needing a special TLD.

      If you wish, you could also add the fact these "advertisers" does not want to be called spammers, so why on earth would they want a .spam address?

    2. Re:top level domain .spam by theonetruekeebler · · Score: 3, Funny

      After that, maybe they can require burglars to wear black turtlenecks and a Cato mask, and carry a burlap sack with "LOOT" written on it. If they're caught wearing, say, a tiara, they can be busted for "not dressing like a burglar." Also, supervillains should speak with a Russian accent and wear a cape.

      --
      This is not my sandwich.
  14. Comment regarding complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a company does something bad, I strongly suggest reporting it to the Better Business Bureau.

    As for GoDaddy.com, I currently use them. I also use DomainsByProxy.com. I currently trust both of them. If one of them were to do something to me, and they fail to resolve it, I would contact the BBB. In addition to contacting the BBB, I'd spread word of mouth (over the Net) of what they've done to me.

    1. Re:Comment regarding complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also use godaddy + domainsbyproxy and havent had a problem with them. I dislike the godaddy interface, but I was also wary of going with a different registrar with an obscure site that isn't ICANN accredited. That's the main reason I went with godaddy, although looking back through the comments, namecheap.com looks pretty good.
      If either godaddy or domainsbyproxy were to do anything to make me question their trustability, I would transfer immedietly.

  15. Lawyer by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you're serious, you should talk to a lawyer. He should know the proper, and legal, ways to register the domain so that the contact info points to your legal representative, not your personal info.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  16. Some TLDs allow you to withold your details by dizzyduck · · Score: 2, Informative
    Nominet (administrators of the .uk TLD) allow individuals to withold their personal details from WHOIS via the Registrants Online interface. The only visible information is your name.
    Registrant's Address:

    THE REGISTRANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS ELECTED TO
    HAVE THEIR ADDRESS OMITTED FROM THE WHOIS DATABASE
    --
    Allergy advice: Contains eggs.
    1. Re:Some TLDs allow you to withold your details by rpjs · · Score: 1

      This has to be offered because of the UK Data Protection Act, so presumably any UK-based registrar, whether offering .*.uk or .com or whatever, should offer a similar service.

  17. Registerfly by rubberbando · · Score: 1

    I like registerfly they are cheap ($9.99/yr) for a domain name and an extra 99cents/yr to have them hide your whois info. They even throw in 25MB of webspace, offer framed forwarding (no ad banners like register.com), and a bunch of other free services. Once I switched to them, I never looked back. :-)

    --
    DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
  18. My Domain by priceb · · Score: 1

    I use MyDomain.com for my domain registrations, 8.50 a year and I get very little junk mail or spam. If you are that worried though, get a free email account and a PO Box, the 25$ a year for the box will be well worth it.

  19. Privacy by rawg · · Score: 2, Informative

    For email, I setup a email address that only receives mail from the registrar. All other email is bounced.

    For my phone, I'm on the national do not all list. That's an $11,000 fine if someone calls me to sell me something.

    My home/business addresses are not really a problem. The only crap mail I get is from Domain Registry of America. I use junk mail to start my fires when it gets cold. The amount of junk mail I get makes it real easy to start the fire on the first try.

    --
    The above is not worth reading.
  20. Somewhat simple solution by zangdesign · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Use a real email address at your domain. Since you control it - set it to filter keep only mail from GoDaddy and your hosting company, since your email from those companies will be coming from known sources.

    Use a second account as your personal email, but don't publish that address and make it something slightly off-kilter so spammers have a harder time guessing it.

    --
    To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    1. Re:Somewhat simple solution by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Problem with this is that these domain registrars like to use alternative domains to contact their customers. Godaddy uses supportwebsite.com for all inquiries, and Network Solutions, well they've got aliase domains up the wazoo.

      --

      eTrade SUCKS
  21. I AGREE: GODADDY SUCKS by goombah99 · · Score: 1
    GoDaddy seems like agood deal but it's not. If you use their masked domain forwarding mode to forward the domain to your host you can only forward a single page!!! yes that's right you can only forward index.html. if you try to do something like
    myMaskedDomain.com/sublevel/page.html
    what happens is goDaddy's asinine servers resolve this as
    Godaddy.com/sublevel/page.html
    which, since there is no sublevel on the godaddy server. so it breaks. you can only forward a specific page on the top level of your domain. no one can link to it.

    next the way they do masked forwarding is simmilar to how most people do it, with an embedded frame html. However their HTML is faulty. for reasons I have not determined most macintosh browsers dont quite handle it right. Specifically if someone tries to print your page what comes out is different then what you see on screen. Its related to the way the frame is being displayed but its not obvious why this happens. But its a fact.

    Only recently has the go-daddy webpage itself started working well with Safari. up until recently to edit your setting you had to pull up internet explorer to be able to view the web page features.

    Finally their customer service is among the worst I have ever experienced. You never get any resolution and the people must be retarded since they always seem to send you out a boiler plate response taken from their FAQ to a different question than the one you asked. You cant get them on the phone. and you never get a resolution to your problem.

    Contrast this to NameZero.com which cost twice as much as goDaddy but you get personal replys promptly from experts, usually the same person, till your problem is resolved. After the go-daddy experience, paying $10 more per year not to waste my time wasa relief. the tech support explanations are clear and they are able to speak in expert terms for experts and simple terms for newbies. the masked domain forwarding works for all subdirectories on your host and the frame html renders correctly on all browsers I have tried.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  22. On PO boxes, eamil, and such by dacarr · · Score: 3, Informative
    First, PO boxes. Diverting all domain related snail spam to a post office box really isn't the purpose of putting a PO box in your whois record, it's to divert the attention from where your system really is. I for one really don't get that much snail spam or domain spam (more on that in a second).

    So you get the PO box, for one reason - as far as the untrained eye without a legal proceeding is concerned, your computer with your domain is actually housed inside of a box that, at its smallest, is the size of a one foot thick index card. They need legal documentation to get your real address, and you in turn need to prove to the USPS where you really live.

    The email address is a little simpler. It's easy enough to set in your /etc/aliases file (or whatever your MTA of choice uses) something like 'hostmaster' or 'hostslave' and have it divert to you, and in turn you just have either Procmail or your MUA of choice to stick it in a folder that you might check on once in a while. After a while, remove/change the address, change it in the whois record, and watch as the few spams that come in just kind of bounce.

    In short, in my experience it's really not that much that you're going to get in the way of junk mail of any flavor. YMMV.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  23. Dotster by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Informative

    My registrar is Dotster, who has a free spam whois shield available for its customers. The email address in the domain info given out is really an alias to the one you give them, and that alias shifts like once a week or so (not sure on how often). This is generally not often enough to get onto spam lists, though I have gotten a couple of messages over the last few years. Obviously not something to worry about.

  24. Domain Registry of America scam by mabu · · Score: 1

    I blame one unscrupulous company for most of the problems in this area, and that's the Domain Registry of America scam where they send out misleading "renewal notices" even though they're not the registrar for the domain. Why these people are still allowed to operate is beyond me.

    1. Re:Domain Registry of America scam by aok · · Score: 1

      Same thing with Domain Registry of Canada. Their envelopes and letterheads even look like it might come from the government.

  25. formerly known as rackshack by sakura+the+mc · · Score: 1, Informative

    http://www.ev1servers.net

    not only do they do dedicated servers, but you can also get domains through them. you have to sumbit real info for payment, but after you purchase the domain, they have no problem with you putting fake info on your domain.

  26. Better Still by waldoj · · Score: 1

    Ooh, or, instead of starting a company to register the domain, you could buy an identity from the Nigerian and establish residency there, including buying a house (which you could keep empty) to function as a drop-box for mail and the like.

    That'd be easier than getting, like, a PO box.

    -Waldo Jaquith

  27. NameSecure by tekiegreg · · Score: 1

    Their NamePrivacy option (for an extra charge) masks all your details. People can still contact you with certified/priority mail to your listed address on your domain, and the email address listed constantly changes making it difficult to harvest. Check them out http://www.namesecure.com

    --
    ...in bed
  28. RegisterFly by lortho · · Score: 1

    RegisterFly.com has a pretty good service for this (for only a buck extra per year when you register with/transfer to them), and their terms appear to be a lot saner than GoDaddy's.

  29. Re: RegisterFly.com -- ugh... by hlygrail · · Score: 2, Informative

    As an IT manager at a previous employer, I once had to consolidate a bunch of domain names to a single vendor (Verisign terms, at the time, didn't suck as much as they seem to now, so that's where we consolidated). All the other domain hosting services let go of the records once they were notified and had verified the validity of my request.

    RegisterFly, on the other hand, fought tooth and nail to hold on to it, and only let go once we got our company attorneys involved. I never understood the reasoning -- we only had 4 months left with them anyway, and we'd paid such a ridiculously low amount to register the name anyway, I"m certain they spent more manpower dollars in fighting the transfer than they ever could have made on the original domain registration fees.

    Truly the worst part (then anyway, YMMV now) was that they didn't have a phone contact method -- most everything had to be done via online chat, and INVARIABLY the person "typing" on the other end (loosely stated because of their awful grammar skills) didn't have a clue. Nevertheless, you may have better experiences with them, but you couldn't pay me to put a domain with them now.

  30. "Anonymous" domain registration problems by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    • Most of the "anonymous domain registration" schemes involve some dummy party actually being the domain owner. If you ever get into a dispute with that party, you have a problem.
    • Those "indemnification" clauses really matter in a situation like this. If someone goes after the dummy party, you'll end up paying their legal fees.
    • Operating a business anonymously is a criminal offense in many jurisdictions, including California.
    • It's not clear what happens if someone files a Whois Data Problem Report for your "anonymous" domain. But you probably won't like what happens.
    • If someone wants your domain, they could make a case under the UDRP that your registration was in bad faith.
    • Some spam filters may blacklist mail from, or mail that mentions, anonymous domains. It's like putting up a sign that says "I am a slimeball".
    • There are signs of a crackdown on anonymous business web sites. Microsoft is sueing "bullet proof web hosting" firms.
  31. Address encrytption and excellent control panel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a number of domains registered with http://domaindiscover.com/ (also known as http://buydomains.com/). They have an excellent control panel, good prices, domain forwarding, URL forwarding, temp pages, parking, frame forwarding, accessible MX records, and last year they introduced the ability to encrpyt your registration email address in the whois database - this single act alone cut my spam by about 70%, and I'm very grateful to them. I have even had reason to speak with the company on one occasion, and dealt with a friendly, knowledgeable and helpful guy within seconds, who answered all my queries.

  32. idea that webhost could do by linuxbaby · · Score: 1
    a web hosting (or domain-registering) company could do this for all new domains (if the client chooses):
    • use the company as contact info
    • set email address as that-domain-name@domains.webhost.com
    • have incoming email to that email address sit on protected servers forever, but give the client webmail access to it in their members login area
    • that way incoming spam will never bother them, but be there if they need it (like if changing registrars)

    I'll bet something like vpopmail could do easy unlimited accounts on the fly like that, so that a webhost company wouldn't even need to charge extra for this service.

  33. http://www.myprivacy.ca/ by MDMurphy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Use MyPrivacy.ca. They give you a free email address that will forward to your existing address. They only allow email from legit domain hosts to get through unchallenged. If from just anyone, they have to go through a challenge/response system.

    Works great, I've yet to get any Spam in the last few years that I've been using them.

    http://www.myprivacy.ca/

  34. SpamGourmet - or pobox. by cheros · · Score: 1

    Clear down the counter every so often at Spam Gourmet or adjust the anti-spam behaviour with a Pobox account.

    Or get your ISP do hold the domain on your behalf

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  35. A quick overview by way of followup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've got ten domains at Godaddy. All of them have Domains-by-Proxy too. Nothing in particular to hide. It's just none of your damn business. If you want to get me an email, you can do so. But having a net connection doesn't buy you the right to know where I sleep. Darling.

    Anyway, I did some fairly thorough looking around for alternatives, based on the last few days of posting in this thread, and here's what I found.

    Most of the registrars mentioned here don't cut it, in terms of a blanket WHOIS proxy.

    I'm attracted to Gandi on principle, but just hiding my email address is not enough, I'm afraid. Not being able to call them kinda sucks too.

    Same for DomainDiscover (on the proxy piece).

    I can't find any mention of a proxy at Dotster.

    Namesecure says flat out that they won't proxy the name field.

    Enom and their resellers are a mixed bag. Enom apparently offers some kind of guardian service at the same prices as Godaddy, but they sure don't make it very obvious what they'll do or won't do. The front page ad says "ID Protect - Only $8.00/yr per domain", but the link underneath it (to their 'Knowledge Base') doesn't lead to any information at all about the service.

    The one ray of light among them was Registerfly, also an Enom reseller if I understand correctly. "Protectfly" is advertised well, explained well, and cheap. I'm not transferring, because I'd rather go to the source than to a reseller. But I will consider it for future accounts.

    Love to hear back/get corrected/be flamed if anyone's still reading the thread. Peace.

    1. Re:A quick overview by way of followup by Zareste · · Score: 1

      Nothing in particular to hide. It's just none of your damn business

      Precisely. Though, there's never a need to say you have nothing to hide. When somebody wants to go shovel up information about you, that means there's something wrong with them, not you.

      Just thought I'd drop by and say that anyone who thinks you owe them your info is the malicious one.

      --
      I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!